Will the Memo ruin the Mid-terms for the Ds?

No. I accepted Trump's victory. I accepted the results as a good news, bad news situation. The good news, Hillary lost. The bad news, Trump won.

 

So your liberal self refuses to see a difference? Figures.

 

Saying that I voted for evil sounds hysterical to me.

 

that was what the 2016 election was between. A choice of poisons. Cyanide or Arsenic. Satan vs. the Devil. At least in mmy eyes. I would have voted for almost any other Democrat against Trump than Clinton. I also would have voted for almost any other Republican against Clinton other than Trump.

I wanted both defeated. Didn't get my wish. But I suppose one being defeated is better than none. How that works out, time will tell.

 

Stop drinking the koolade and repeating what you are told and think for yourself.

 

No.

Republicans writing down words will not effect anything.

 

That is you in the mirror, Arjay, to whom you are speaking.

We are nation that goes by the Rule of Law, not the Rule of Trump.

 

If you still need more time to figure it out then I doubt any candidate who had a chance of winning would meet your standards.

 

While I agree with your analysis of the failure of Hillary and the Dems in 2016 it does not substantiate your allegation that she would have left this nation in "far worse shape" than the BLOTUS is currently doing. Let's face the fact honestly that even a mediocre do-nothing potus would be a vast improvement over the BLOTUS. I would take Nixon, Ford, Carter or Bush jr over the BLOTUS and all of them left America in "worse shape" than they found it. But whatever damage they achieved in their terms pales in comparison to what the BLOTUS has done to this nation in a single year. The damage is staggering and we haven't even felt the worst of it yet. Kansas knows what we are about to experience economically because they had to deal with Brownback's odious fiscal malfeasance. We haven't even begun to grasp the devastating damage that the BLOTUS taxcuts are going to cause to our nation. And yes, I can state without equivocation that Hillary would have vetoed them in a heartbeat. Just this one factor alone means that she would have been a better potus. Not that the bar is high since the BLOTUS has already lowered it into the sewer.

The only positive aspect that I can see about the BLOTUS is that he is a complete and utter refutation of EVERYTHING that the GOP has been lying about for the last 3 decades. No, you can't run the government like a business. No, someone from corporate America is not fit to run this nation. No, taxcuts do not "stimulate" the economy. No, the partisan disinformation of the alt right does NOT override the Law of the Land. No, America is NOT a conservative white Christian nation. I could go on but you get the picture.

Personally I would have been more than happy to have a curmudgeon like Bernie in the Oval office right now. He might be a socialist but he would do what was right for We the People and ultimately that is what actually matters.

 

The alt right disinformation in the memo is NOT factually accurate.

 

Trey Gowdy says GOP memo won't have "any impact" on Russia ... www.cbsnews.com/news/trey-gowdy-says-memo-wont...

Rep. Trey Gowdy on the GOP memo, Russia probe. ... "There is a Russia investigation without a dossier. So to the ... "So there's going to be a Russia probe, even ...

 

I've been voting since 1968 back when one had to be 21 and most candidates met my standards in almost every election. The two major party candidates didn't in 2016. You're assuming because if one dislikes, distrusts, thinks both major party candidates are bad for America, one still has to choose between them. One election doesn't set a trend. Bad candidates are bad candidates regardless of party or even third party candidates. Perhaps you think both candidates were the best of the best. I thought just the opposite and registered my vote against both.

 

If the choice in 2016 had been between any of those you mention and hundreds you didn't other than Hillary Clinton, I would have voted for them instead of third party. I would have voted for Biden, Sanders, Webb, O'Malley or almost any other Democrat living or dead against Trump other than Hillary Clinton.

Would she have been better, like I said we'll never know since it didn't happen. But she would have faced a lot of the same type of opposition Trump has. She would have gone into the office of the presidency with approximate 60% of Americans opposing her just like Trump. Voting to the lesser of two evils or the least horrible candidate or for the candidate you want to lose the least doesn't equate into support for the winner.

Instead of the Democrats out to destroy Trump, you would have had the republicans out to destroy Clinton. But unlike the Democrats, the Republicans still would have control of congress. The GOP could launch investigation after investigation at will on the Clinton Foundation, her E-Mails, etc. The Republican congress could refuse to bring up any Clinton initiatives. I think the atmosphere of destruction would have prevailed except only the person that destruction was aimed would change along with the party trying to destroy the person.

Clinton wasn't liked anymore than Trump was at the time of the election. Both were disliked pretty much equally and that dislike would have continued on into her presidency. Hillary wouldn't have been as uncouth as Trump, that much is for sure and she probably would have acted more presidential. I think her job approval rating would have remained as low as Trump's has. What both major parties fail to realize is how much their nominees were disliked by America as a whole. That dislike wasn't about to go away just because one or the other won.

 

President Sanders, energizing the Dem base and working established congressional alliances to keep the Repubs from being self-destructive. But no, Clinton needed to be a power hungry bitch and so we ended up with Trump. The only bright side I can see is that a Blue wave is more likely under Trump than Sanders.

 

You're right........ Trump's SOTU unity speech seems like a life time ago............

 

You're right, Sanders energized his supporters much like Trump did his. Hillary's supporters were more ho hum. Sanders was one candidate whose favorable opinion of him by America as a whole was twenty points higher than those who viewed him unfavorable. Trump and Clinton were just the opposite. Both were seen in an negative light or seen unfavorable by at least 20 points higher than those who viewed them favorably.

I think Sanders would have beaten Trump easily, that almost any other candidate besides Hillary would have won fairly easily. Hillary probably would have won herself regardless of being viewed very negative outside of her core of supporters if her campaign hadn't been so inept, her strategy so flawed, if she had been so dang lazy.

I also think the democrats will take back the house this midterm. I would say for sure if the election were held today. But we still have a long way to go and all sorts of things can happen that change the dynamics of the midterm elections.

 

Short of the Repubs turning on Trump, no. And if they do, the Russian blackmail that's been forcing them ignore the FSB takeover of our government will still ruin them.

This isn't a case of unpopular policy, the Repubs are actively commiting treason. It might only last a single election cycle, gods know the mob is fickle, but short of rigging the election they're not going to win this 1.

 

A democrat only claims that when it benefits himself when in fact he want a nation that only bows to his current desires.

Also, you are wrong in your "Rule of Law" statement. The courts are constantly changing the law to fit their agenda so there is no "Rule of Law".

 

There is plenty of treason to go around, not just on the republican side.

Clinton selling uranium, Obama trading five high value prisons for a deserter, Schumer closing down the government for egotistical reason all come to mind.

When making a claim like this, at least be honest enough to admit all sides have some guilt.

 

I am no more a dem than you are a mainstream American Republican concerned for the Republic.

The Rule of Law in America always stomps down on the Rule of Man as Trump et al are finding out.

 

Stop being reasonable. You will never influence people with logic and reason.

You got to excite them with fear, so they follow reductio ad absurdum as truth.

 

Clinton did not see uranium is the fact.

Obama traded five prisoners for Bergdahl.

The GOP closed down the government because it would not negotiate on the Dreamers.

 

No...I think in a two party system such as ours, voting third party is the same as non voting. So in the American system, bragging about your third party vote is equivalent to bragging about not voting at all, which people seldom do. So your purpose for voting is simply virtue signalling.

 

It's officially registering an opposition to the two major party candidates. Voting third party makes your opposition official. In a way it is saying, "I'm fed up and I'm not taking it anymore." It is a way to fight back at two major parties who nominated two inane and insane candidates.

Others may be satisfied with the status quo, but not all of us.

 

How can you even think that when the lower courts are constantly trying to overturn orders from Trump as unconditional only to have SCOTUS reverse the lower courts rulings, supposedly based on the rule of law?